Computer Misuse Act Quiz

Reviewed by Editorial Team

The ProProfs editorial team is comprised of experienced subject matter experts. They've collectively created over 10,000 quizzes and lessons, serving over 100 million users. Our team includes in-house content moderators and subject matter experts, as well as a global network of rigorously trained contributors. All adhere to our comprehensive editorial guidelines, ensuring the delivery of high-quality content.

Learn about Our Editorial Process

| By Collegeprof101

Collegeprof101

Community Contributor

Quizzes Created: 1 | Total Attempts: 687

| Attempts: 687 | Questions: 15

Quiz Flashcard

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Whatsapp Share on Pinterest Share on Email Copy to Clipboard Embed on your website

Question 1 / 15

0 %

0/100

Score 0/100

1. A friend often comes to your house and will use your tablet computer when you are out of the room. You tell her that she is not allowed to do that even though the tablet is not password protected. The next time she comes over she again uses your tablet when you are out of the room. Has she committed an offence under the CMA?

No, you should have password protected your tablet.

Yes, this is an unauthorised modification of your data

Yes, this is an unauthorised access to your tablet and its data

No, if you invite her into your home she has an implied right to access your tablet

This is essentially Ellis v DPP. As soon as you told your friend she was not entitled to do this whe was put on notice that her access was unauthorised.

Explanation

This is essentially Ellis v DPP. As soon as you told your friend she was not entitled to do this whe was put on notice that her access was unauthorised.

Submit

About This Quiz

This quiz assesses knowledge of the UK's Computer Misuse Act, focusing on legal implications of actions like virus creation, unauthorized data access, and misuse of computer systems. It's... see moreideal for learners interested in cybersecurity and legal compliance. see less

2. Using a Computer to access data without authorisation is covered by which section of the Computer Misuse Act?

Section 1

Section 2

Section 3

Section 3ZA

Section 1 is all about accessing data without authorisation

Explanation

Section 1 is all about accessing data without authorisation

Submit

3. Where does the Computer Misuse Act 1990 apply?

The EU

The UK

Globally

England & Wales

Although the Act can regulate actions which have effects overseas the territorial scope of the UK is to the UK only.

Explanation

Although the Act can regulate actions which have effects overseas the territorial scope of the UK is to the UK only.

Submit

4. To be guilty of the offence in section 1 of the Computer Misuse Act 1990 what must a defendant cause a computer to do?

Allow access to data without permission

Commit a fraud

Perform a function

Obtain money

The s.1 offence (hacking) is accessing data without authorisation on a computer

Explanation

The s.1 offence (hacking) is accessing data without authorisation on a computer

Submit

5. A security tester, based in the UK, who tests computer security by attempting to hack into them is committing an offence under the Computer Misuse Act if...

He is authorised to attempt to gain access to they systems

The computer he used and the computer attacked aren't in the UK

He uses the access he gained to commit a further crime

He doesn't test the system properly

Section 2 of the Act states that any access to computer programs or data which is done with the intent to commit further crimes is illegal.

Explanation

Section 2 of the Act states that any access to computer programs or data which is done with the intent to commit further crimes is illegal.

Submit

6. A friend accesses the LSE's servers to find the home address of another student as they are obsessed with them and want to get their address to "stalk" them. They then find the LSE servers do not have the home address of students so this was a waste of time. What offence if any have they committed?

No offence. As the information they sought was not there there is no offence

Section 2 offence. Access with intent to commit another offence

Section 1 offence. Unauthorised access but they could not commit a further offence (impossible)

No offence. Students are allowed to use the LSE system

This is a s.2 offence, even though the further offence could not actually be committed in this fashion - see s.2(3). Also stalking is covered as it has a potential 5 year prison sentence.

Explanation

This is a s.2 offence, even though the further offence could not actually be committed in this fashion - see s.2(3). Also stalking is covered as it has a potential 5 year prison sentence.

Submit

7. A person installs a new piece of software on their own computer which subsequently slows it down impairing their use of it. Could the software manufacturer be prosecuted under the Computer Misuse Act?

No, the act doesn't cover consumer software.

Yes, the software has impaired the operation of the computer so s.3 applies

Yes, the user didn't give the software permission slow down their computer

No, the user gave authorisation for the software to be installed and run therefore the Act does not apply

This law deals with unauthorised access, modification and impairment only. Not authorised actions.

Explanation

This law deals with unauthorised access, modification and impairment only. Not authorised actions.

Submit

8. You work as a journalist for a local newspaper. One day someone files a story saying Andy Murray (the great tennis player, not law professor) is in town. You really want to meet him and get his autograph so you look at the story details filed on your employer's database to see where he is staying. Have you committed an offence?

Yes, this is a breach of s.1 of the Act

Yes, this is a breach of s.2 of the Act

No, this is access of a type which is generally authorised to you

No, the Act is not engaged at all

This is based upon Bignall and Allison. Allison overruled the Bignall authorised access for an unauthorised purpose defence. It is not s.2 as an autograph is not a further offence.

Explanation

This is based upon Bignall and Allison. Allison overruled the Bignall authorised access for an unauthorised purpose defence. It is not s.2 as an autograph is not a further offence.

Submit

9. Someone uses a laptop as a hammer to destroy a Hard Drive containing sensitive data, could they be convicted under the Computer Misuse Act?

It would depend on whether they were authorised to access the data on the Hard Drive

Yes, this is using computer equipment for modification of data

No, physical damage isn't covered by the Act

It would depend on whether they were authorised to modify the data on the Hard Drive

The physical damage is still covered by the Criminal Damage Act. The CMA only deals with alteration, impairment or deletion of data.

Explanation

The physical damage is still covered by the Criminal Damage Act. The CMA only deals with alteration, impairment or deletion of data.

Submit

10. Is the creation of viruses specifically prohibited under the Computer Misuse Act?

No, viruses are not mentioned in the Act

Yes because viruses are harmful

Yes because viruses slow down computers

No, viruses are only prohibited when the cause (or intend to cause) impairment of a computer

The Act doesn't prohibit the creation of viruses, or indeed using them on equipment/data with the owners permission. However if the virus does access or modify data or impair a computer without authorisation it becomes illegal

Explanation

Submit

11. Is there following statement correct and why?"System administrators have a legal obligation (as part of this act) to protect their systems from hackers"

True, sysadmins are required to do all they can to protect data

False, the Act has no such obligation

False, the Act doesn't specifically mention hacking

True, sysadmins are required to stop hackers at all costs

This is beyond the scope of the Act but may be covered under some contract law

Explanation

This is beyond the scope of the Act but may be covered under some contract law

Submit

12. Where could Gary MacKinnon have been tried?

Anywhere that is a signatory of the Cybercrime Convention

Only the UK

Only the US

Either the UK or the US

He could be tried under s4(1)(b) in England & Wales (the UK is of course not a single jurisdiction) and he could have been tried under Federal Laws in the US.

Explanation

He could be tried under s4(1)(b) in England & Wales (the UK is of course not a single jurisdiction) and he could have been tried under Federal Laws in the US.

Submit

13. A person is convicted of accessing the LSE network and modifying their grades in the student records, what is the maximum penalty they face?

Up to six months in prison and a fine of up to £5000

Up to 10 years in prison and an unlimited fine

Up to 5 years in prison and an unlimited fine

Up to 12 months in prison and a fine of up to £5000

This is an offence under s.3(2)(c) of the Act "to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data" This carries an up to 10 year sentence.

Explanation

This is an offence under s.3(2)(c) of the Act "to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data" This carries an up to 10 year sentence.

Submit

14. A hacker group attacks the webpage of 10 Downing Street and occupies it using a DDoS attack. They issue a statement that this was done to protest the UK's climate change policy. Have they a defence against any charges under s.3 of the CMA?

Yes, this is protected political speech under s.3(5)(d)

No, these acts do not meet the political speech defence in s.3(5)(d)

Yes, the Act has a general defence for political hacktivism

No, there is no defence for hacktivist speech

Firstly, there is no s.3(5)(d). Secondly there are no defences for hacktivists.

Explanation

Firstly, there is no s.3(5)(d). Secondly there are no defences for hacktivists.

Submit

15. A poorly constructed mailserver goes a little crazy and sends 100,000 messages to [email protected]. This causes the LSE mailserver to fail. Is there a possible CMA offence?

Yes, under s.3

Yes, under s3A

No, there is no intent

No, mail servers permit the sending of mail in this fashion so it was authorised

Even though there was no intent this could be seen to be reckless under s.3(3)

Explanation

Even though there was no intent this could be seen to be reckless under s.3(3)

Submit

View My Results

Quiz Review Timeline (Updated): Mar 15, 2023 +

Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.